60D RAW video - it's working !!!

[sarotaz]

How to remove dead/hot pixel with update 7 (without lv_af_raw)?

[kotik]

This chart states that the 60D works with ExFat formatted SD-cards.
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6215
During testing ML RAW last week trying to get the maximum number of frames, I formatted a SD-card in ExFat on a Mac.
ML didn't work on this card, did anyone succeeded in ExFat format on the 60D?

[mihnea77@gmail.com]

I was wondering: isn't there any possible way of squashing the raw frames thru digic in a basic zip algorithm to reduce their sizes before dumping them thru bloody sd writer bottleneck?

[kotik]

I was wondering: isn't there any possible way of squashing the raw frames thru digic in a basic zip algorithm to reduce their sizes before dumping them thru bloody sd writer bottleneck?

Yep, you got that already for free!
It is called H.264 in a QuickTime MOV container.     

[Bioskop.Inc]

@Marekk - any chance of another compile, as A1ex has said that:

"16:9 is 1728x972 on 60D. The mod32/64 restriction is no longer there."

& there seem to be some new crop sizes in Raw_Record, which might mean that we get some better sizes than 960x544 & perhaps some longer recording times.

Also, since it looks like we might be getting a RAW to CinemaDNG converter, is there anything that can be done to solve the Hot Pixels that still exist?

[sarotaz]

hey guys, is there a way to zoom raw crop area (ex 960x540) to fit display of the camera? (only for better visualization during recording)

[larrycafe]

I switch the video mode to 1280/60

and then use the ML frame override to 23.97.

however, I found that the shutter I can choose is limited, the top LCD shows 1/4000, but the ML display it is 1/40.

am I doing anything wrong?

[sarotaz]

but recording in 960x540 in 720 mode, final quality is the same as recording 960x540 in 1080 mode or less?

[Bioskop.Inc]

Going to re-shoot some scenes for a short film using RAW & it will be a low light scene at a desk.
I have been following the ETTR principle & this is the result.

Light from a table lamp.
Everything shot @ ISO 800
16:9 1728x992 @ 23.976 fps (108 frames or 5 secs).
Lens F Stop was the only difference.

[kotik]

Going to re-shoot some scenes for a short film using RAW & it will be a low light scene at a desk.
I have been following the ETTR principle & this is the result.

Light from a table lamp.
Everything shot @ ISO 800
16:9 1728x992 @ 23.976 fps (108 frames or 5 secs).
Lens F Stop was the only difference.

Looking very clean!
What lens did you use?

[Bioskop.Inc]

Looking very clean!
What lens did you use?

Nikon 24mm f2.8 ai-s
Think the f stops were about 4 & 11.

Following ETTR really works, just tried it with 960x544 & the difference is amazing!
Yes there's still some noise, which is intensified due to upscaling, but still minimal compared to exposing normally - now the sensor noise really does look more like film grain.

[kotik]

Think the f stops were about 4 & 11.

Why the big difference in lens stops? 3 stops? ETTR needs more light or the other way around?

[Bioskop.Inc]

Because of the ISO being at 800, i wanted to expose one by following ETTR & the other as I would normally have done.
So to keep the ISO the same for both (& so the potential noise would be the same), i just moved f stop.
If i had lowered the ISO then the test would have been redundant, as the noise levels would have been different.

[a1ex]

Heh, I thought it's clear for everybody that more light = less noise.

Also higher ISO = less noise (all other things being equal), but that's another story.

[kotik]

Heh, I thought it's clear for everybody that more light = less noise.

Also higher ISO = less noise (all other things being equal), but that's another story.

Well, in Digital Video, pushing gain gives more noise. And we always try to keep it to 0!
In digital photography they still use the 'ISO' magic word, but technically speaking it is just gain.

So yes, I'm very surprised by your second remark.   ;-)

[CarVac]

I was playing around with capturing video with the camera set in 640x480 cropped mode, capturing RAW.

It seems to inconsistently limit the resolution; when in centered or dolly, it limits to 704x544 but in 'left' the display flickers between that and 768x576. When in 'left' it actually does end up recording 768x576.

Framing itself is weird. In the 544 height modes, it seems to record left of where the Canon live view displays. I don't remember the vertical; it's too confusing to commit to memory and I was deleting the videos as I went.

In 'left', it records almost all of the way to the top of the Canon live view, and basically all of the way to the right of the Canon live view, with a ton on the bottom and left. Apparently you're supposed to move the focus box, but I can't do this as I'm using a manual lens (which is what I would be using for video anyway).

I tried changing the display modes, but the 'ML' black-and-white display mode doesn't do anything different from the Auto except it doesn't show any cropmarks.

Anyone else have any experiences they'd like to share?

[a1ex]

Well, in Digital Video, pushing gain gives more noise. And we always try to keep it to 0!
In digital photography they still use the 'ISO' magic word, but technically speaking it is just gain.

So yes, I'm very surprised by your second remark.   ;-)

Look at the pictures from here: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5693.msg41110#msg41110

Which is noisier? ISO 100 or ISO 3200?

[Burni_]

Great advice, thanks!

When you say ONLY 1280x720, do you mean selecting 1280x720p as a crop in the Magic Lantern raw settings menu, or do you mean putting the camera into 1280x720p mode in the Canon menu and shooting raw 1280x720p that way?

In the movie mode my camera is set to 1920x1080p and then I set the RAW module to shoot in 1280x720p I haven't experimented much with setting up the camera in 720p and then the RAW as well in 720p, but I've seen people saying you might get lower quality.

@DerekDock - Nice bro! Once you start noticing the whole behavior of the camera and how to avoid these small issues it becomes truly pleasant to work with it and apply it in your work.

Still I'd be cautious on the whole thing!

[kotik]

Look at the pictures from here: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5693.msg41110#msg41110

Which is noisier? ISO 100 or ISO 3200?

You are cheating!     You forgot to mention that that is the case when using ETTR!

[Bioskop.Inc]

Heh, I thought it's clear for everybody that more light = less noise.

Also higher ISO = less noise (all other things being equal), but that's another story.

It really stumped me, but shit i never thought it would be that good!
I was struggling to get nice images at ISO100 & now i realise that was sooooo wrong.
I've tested the same ETTR principles with 960x544 & its a whole different ball game -quality has now risen to new hights.
I would like some different crop sizes, but we are relying on 1 person to compile new stuff for the 60D.
Any body going to step up to compile new builds for us?
Also, A1ex what about that extra memory in the 60D, can that be used for anything?

[a1ex]

Well... for storing a few more frames. This is the strong point of 60D: a few seconds at high resolution.

For continuous recording, don't expect more than 960x540 at 24 fps.

[Bioskop.Inc]

Well... for storing a few more frames. This is the strong point of 60D: a few seconds at high resolution.

For continuous recording, don't expect more than 960x540 at 24 fps.

I know nothing about coding etc..., but couldn't this extra memory be used to store stuff before it gets to the SD card - a buffer within a buffer?
I was just thinking that if the original Canon firmware was taking a Raw reading & then processing it, then it had to store those images somewhere (even if for a little while) before it processed them to a H264 .mov file?
Couldn't that extra memory be used for exactly the same thing but just holding up the write process to the SD card?

I'm not trying to be greedy & now i've discovered the benefits of ETTR, i'll be happy with 960x544 @ 24fps.

Just it seems crazy that there's extra memory that could be used for storage or something...

[a1ex]

What do you think we use the buffers for? Drawing stars on the display?

[Bioskop.Inc]

What do you think we use the buffers for? Drawing stars on the display?

Not that stupid! Just think that maybe people are over looking the potential of the 60D _ yes i'm cursing the fact that they upgraded the 50D & left out the CF card option!
But couldn't there be more buffers involved with that extra memory, which you said was available - so instead of x8 31M, we get x10? Or have i not understood a thing?

[kotik]

Not that stupid! Just think that maybe people are over looking the potential of the 60D _ yes i'm cursing the fact that they upgraded the 50D & left out the CF card option!
But couldn't there be more buffers involved with that extra memory, which you said was available - so instead of x8 31M, we get x10? Or have i not understood a thing?

Those buffers are memory hardware in your 60D. Eager to rebuild yours?   

While your 60D is open you can implement a Black Magic Design SSD drive the same time!